![o{]:)](http://www.wdtprs.com/blog/wp-images/topimage.JPG)
Just tuning in
Great! I am watching now the live coverage of the USCCB meeting.
Commercials at the beginning!
UPDATE:
Bp. Wester (D.Salt Lake City) reports that Nat. Advisory Council recommended the passing of the block of translations.
16 November 2009
• • • • • •
102 Comments
Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.
What channel or network are you watching? It’s not on EWTN. Thank you.
Comment by wanda — 16 November 2009 @ 1:11 pmYes…where are you watching this??
Comment by chironomo — 16 November 2009 @ 1:21 pmApparently, somewhere on this site: http://www.telecaretv.org/
John in Pomeroy on the Palouse
Comment by PomeroyJohn — 16 November 2009 @ 1:24 pmI’ll eat that crow now, Fr. Z.
I am shocked that EWTN is not providing the feed. It is believed to be a free feed for other Catholic television stations.
EWTN should have just taken the feed and they could have provided their own commentary over it.
If anyone is looking for the feed via internet go here:
http://www.telecaretv.org/ and click watch live.
Comment by Diane at Te Deum Laudamus — 16 November 2009 @ 1:26 pmThere’s a lot of chatter, but the bishops were still walking around a few minutes ago so the discussions have not yet begun.
I’m really miffed about not getting it on EWTN or on CTND where I could have recorded it on my DVR tomorrow when I will be gone all day with some routine medical tests.
I’m emailing EWTN and asking them to reconsider carrying the feed tomorrow and I would encourage others to do the same. It’s free for crying out loud.
Comment by Diane at Te Deum Laudamus — 16 November 2009 @ 1:32 pmHmmm. Pretty negative tone from the hosts on the Translation issue.
Comment by Frank H — 16 November 2009 @ 1:36 pmIt’s still on the EWTN schedule for this afternoon.
Comment by MikeM — 16 November 2009 @ 1:36 pmCouldn’t they have gotten an organ in there for the hymn singing part of the conference…sheezz!
That was some heavy-handed piano playin’ there….
Comment by chironomo — 16 November 2009 @ 1:37 pmDiane..
They seem to archive broadcasts at the Telecare website…perhaps it will be there for later viewing?
Comment by chironomo — 16 November 2009 @ 1:38 pmThe feed has an embed code.
I have it embedded in my blog here if you cannot find it on Telecare:
Comment by Diane at Te Deum Laudamus — 16 November 2009 @ 1:47 pmFrank H: “Pretty negative tone from the hosts on the Translation issue.”
Are we not surprised? I also wonder if Sister bought a new outfit for the occasion.
Comment by TNCath — 16 November 2009 @ 2:00 pmSounds like they just shot down Bp. Trautman’s “stalling” idea…urging immediate approval of the last Grey-book translation sections in order to expediate the recognitio and get on with implementation.
Comment by chironomo — 16 November 2009 @ 2:01 pmYeah Bishop Wester!
Comment by Fr. Erik Richtsteig — 16 November 2009 @ 2:16 pmWait… is that the same Advisory Council I’m thinking of? If so, who asked them?
Comment by MikeM — 16 November 2009 @ 2:29 pmIs the Telecaretv website overwhelmed? I’m only getting the flashing antenna signal [along with the gaudy blue flashing frame].
Comment by Pater OSB — 16 November 2009 @ 2:46 pmI’m watching with only minimal problems on Diane’s Te Deum blog which she linked to above.
P.S. Thanks, Diane! :)
Comment by MikeM — 16 November 2009 @ 2:48 pmIt takes a while for the feed to begin, so just bare with the “static”, blue framed appearance and it will buffer in.
I’m just wondering what their capacity is for internet watchers. Right now the number in the lower left corner has 349 watchers.
Comment by Diane at Te Deum Laudamus — 16 November 2009 @ 2:52 pmCan’t really fault EWTN for not televising this part…dull…
Comment by Fr Martin Fox — 16 November 2009 @ 2:52 pmI can’t fault EWTN at all for not running this part. Just the discussions please.
Geez! I was waiting for the giant puppets to come out with that hymn they replayed a few minutes ago.
Comment by Diane at Te Deum Laudamus — 16 November 2009 @ 2:59 pmI still think EWTN could have had Raymond Arroyo on with someone in between the sessions and just ran the discussion, cutting out these folks (unless the contract did not permit that)
Comment by Diane at Te Deum Laudamus — 16 November 2009 @ 3:00 pmThere is so much talk about the Bishops “leading in faith”, but no actual discussion about what that might mean in practice. I thought the Apostolic Nuncio’s speech was good…some slightly veiled references to disobedient Bishops in there…anybody hear it that way?
Comment by chironomo — 16 November 2009 @ 3:04 pmBTW…who’s the man in the blue jacket?
Comment by chironomo — 16 November 2009 @ 3:05 pmTrivial note…it is striking to realize dat some Catlicks in some of dose udder parrts of dis country have a funny way of tawkin, yuh know whud aye mean?
Comment by Fr Martin Fox — 16 November 2009 @ 3:07 pmLOL
Comment by Vincenzo — 16 November 2009 @ 3:08 pmannudda reason to use Latin…udderwise, youse get: “tru Him, wit Him, in Him…”
Comment by Fr Martin Fox — 16 November 2009 @ 3:08 pmFather Martin…
We have a priest at our parish who says quite clearly:
“The Lord Bewitch You”
And another who refers to the “Blessed Virgin Murray”.
It can be humorous at times!
Comment by chironomo — 16 November 2009 @ 3:16 pmAt the risk of hi-jacking the thread…...
Comment by Midwest St. Michael — 16 November 2009 @ 3:19 pmI llllloooooooooovvvveee Archbishop Sambi’s accent. Now there’s a man who can rrrrrrrrrrrrrrrroollll his “r’s”.
Do we know when the liturgy will be discussed or is that to be determined in this next session?
Comment by Diane at Te Deum Laudamus — 16 November 2009 @ 3:19 pmClick me
Comment by Vincenzo — 16 November 2009 @ 3:20 pmSorry – hit a wrong key….
We used to have a pastor who would say, “The Lard be with you.”
To which I would reply, “It is obviously with you.” (sorry, couldn’t help myself)
Comment by Midwest St. Michael — 16 November 2009 @ 3:21 pmChironomo said: “There is so much talk about the Bishops “leading in faith”, but no actual discussion about what that might mean in practice.
I thought the same thing. I have not heard the word “truth” yet on the panel between sessions.
I thought the Apostolic Nuncio’s speech was good…some slightly veiled references to disobedient Bishops in there…anybody hear it that way?
Ditto – He did use the word truth more than once.
Comment by Diane at Te Deum Laudamus — 16 November 2009 @ 3:21 pmVincenzo – you bad
Comment by Diane at Te Deum Laudamus — 16 November 2009 @ 3:22 pmMidwest…
What exactly IS the topic of the thread such that we would hi-jack it? I thought it was commenting on the broadcast…and right now there is little being said of any substance, so I think it’s fair game to talk about the broadcast itself…
Comment by chironomo — 16 November 2009 @ 3:22 pmOops – clicked too fast.
Me-thinks that’s the beginning of another brilliant piece of artwork by Vincenzo
Comment by Diane at Te Deum Laudamus — 16 November 2009 @ 3:22 pmYes Diane TDL, a little slow. However, I really appreciate the thread of catholicity and sense of communion woven through the various speeches. Listening to the Apostolic Nuncio, I found myself thinking that what we Catholics take for granted others are seriously struggling to acquire. Witness the conflagration in Anglican circles and the quest for unity and truth.
Comment by Warren — 16 November 2009 @ 3:23 pmCommentary by a female religous out of habit and in a business suit….no thank you. The blue blazer is soo 70’s. What is the average age of her order, 75? Much better to have ETWN running the media with Raymond Arroyo and Fr. Z providing commentary.
Comment by Central Valley — 16 November 2009 @ 3:23 pmThe commentary on telecare.tv so far during this break…well, any Catholic blogger on this thread could’ve done better.
Comment by Cathy_of_Alex — 16 November 2009 @ 3:25 pmSorry Midwest…
I thought you were scolding us for engaging in personal commentary on the three men talking right now…
Comment by chironomo — 16 November 2009 @ 3:25 pmI couldn’t get it to show any video although I got the site. EWTN would be waaaaay better, especially with the commentary we know we’d get. Wonder why the change. Let’s just hope and pray that the good outweighs the bad, considering the backbone some of the bishops have developed in recent months.
Comment by Sandy — 16 November 2009 @ 3:26 pmHas anyone succeeded in getting the full screen to work?
Comment by Diane at Te Deum Laudamus — 16 November 2009 @ 3:27 pmHas anyone succeeded in getting the full screen to work?
Yup … using a Mac.
Comment by ghp95134 — 16 November 2009 @ 3:28 pmSoemone cut the mic next time Bp. Troutmouth gets up again.
Comment by Central Valley — 16 November 2009 @ 3:32 pmMy full screen works fine on Vista.
Nice slap-down of Trautmann…I guess he doesn’t realize that the Pope is…well…the POPE!
Comment by chironomo — 16 November 2009 @ 3:33 pmCould Trautman just SIT DOWN!
Comment by chironomo — 16 November 2009 @ 3:34 pmThe time is never lol
Comment by Central Valley — 16 November 2009 @ 3:34 pmHow dare the Holy Father question Bp. Troutmouth…...............toooo much
Comment by Central Valley — 16 November 2009 @ 3:35 pmAnd something else…
What exactly does the Good Bishop Trautmann care about the Antiphons for Mass? Is he planning on implementing their use in place of songs and hymns?
Comment by chironomo — 16 November 2009 @ 3:36 pmIs the Chat room open?
Comment by Central Valley — 16 November 2009 @ 3:38 pmBishop Trautman is doing anything and everything he can find to delay this. There’s no telling how many more rabbits he’s going to pull out of his birretta before this is over.
Comment by TNCath — 16 November 2009 @ 3:44 pmchironomo: ROFL! I was thinking the same thing.
Comment by Cathy_of_Alex — 16 November 2009 @ 3:45 pmI tuned out for the reasons Fr Fox noted. It was rather boring earlier. I laugh about the accent too.
Ray should do an evening recap on EWTN like a 1/2 hour news program, or at least a write up on his blog at the end of each day.
Comment by Peggy R — 16 November 2009 @ 3:48 pmI notice few other bishops have popped up with similar delaying tactics as of yet.
Comment by Fr Martin Fox — 16 November 2009 @ 3:48 pm“Commentary by a female religous out of habit and in a business suit….no thank you. The blue blazer is soo 70’s. What is the average age of her order, 75? Much better to have ETWN running the media with Raymond Arroyo and Fr. Z providing commentary.
Comment by Central Valley — 16 November 2009 @ 3:23 pm”
I agree. These nuns continue to be stuck in the late 1960’s and 1970’s in fashion, worldview, rebelliousness, new age thinking, etc.
Is there any chance Fr. Z becomes the EWTN “color commentator” for future masses and papal visits (ala the late, great Fr. Richard John Neuhaus? Fr. Z would be great and could educate so many more Catholics on the beauty and truth of the liturgy. In fact, Fr. Z needs his own show on EWTN….hopefully the powers that be can make this happen.
Comment by Justin in Ohio — 16 November 2009 @ 3:53 pmOne has to wonder how hard the committee will look into Bp. Troutmanns inquiry this evening. Was it just me or did none of the other bishops look interested.
Comment by Central Valley — 16 November 2009 @ 3:54 pmIf Fr. Z got his own show on ETWN, there would be several California bishops retiring early…..pray hard. Fr. Z did a great job on FOX during the conclave.
Comment by Central Valley — 16 November 2009 @ 3:56 pmWhile many of us pay attention to the bishops’ activities regarding liturgy, I think the Committee on Doctrine deserves credit for its work. It may be the department that has made the most improvement in the past ten years.
Comment by chonak — 16 November 2009 @ 3:58 pmMaybe that would be the impetus for Trautman to retire early too…..;)
Comment by Justin in Ohio — 16 November 2009 @ 3:59 pmclick me
Comment by Vincenzo — 16 November 2009 @ 4:04 pmIf we cut the mic on Bp. Trautman, would that make him ineffable?
Comment by Central Valley — 16 November 2009 @ 4:06 pmI just lost my feed. Anyone else?
Comment by Diane at Te Deum Laudamus — 16 November 2009 @ 4:19 pmI never recall EWTN loosing their signal feeds so often? These guys are minor league.
Comment by Central Valley — 16 November 2009 @ 4:20 pmThis Rockville Center TV station seems to be as bad as the one for the diocese of Fresno Ca.
Comment by Central Valley — 16 November 2009 @ 4:21 pm“I just lost my feed. Anyone else?”
I did—back now.
Comment by Vincenzo — 16 November 2009 @ 4:23 pmPerhaps a smaller and less reliable outlet was chosen in order to prevent the faithful having to see a certain bishop trying to create a crisis.
Comment by Pater OSB — 16 November 2009 @ 4:32 pmI may be wrong, but it was my understanding that the USCCB were the ones that nixed having EWTN cover the conference.
Comment by jjoy — 16 November 2009 @ 4:32 pmSince there are about a dozen diocesan TV systems, I guess we can look forward to more of this lameness.
Can anyone tell whether anybody other than Telecare picked up their feed? Boston’s “CatholicTV” did not.
Comment by chonak — 16 November 2009 @ 4:36 pmNot even Catholic Television Network in Detroit bothered to pick it up, but they usually take feed from EWTN (LOL).
Perhaps those taking the free feed had to buy in to certain stipulations – stipulations that possibly couldn’t live with.
Or, did the decision come down too late for stations to respond to the change in who was providing the feed?
Who knows. All I know is that I’ll bet there are only 5% of the people watching it as were last year, if that. Unless you are watching it on the web, or are local with Telecare, you don’t get to see it.
Comment by Diane at Te Deum Laudamus — 16 November 2009 @ 4:42 pmA Borat quote:
“I could not understand what the old man was saying”
Comment by claiborneinmemphis — 16 November 2009 @ 4:50 pmHa, Vincenzo-you’ve done it again! And twice!
Comment by irishgirl — 16 November 2009 @ 4:53 pmRE my 4:50 comment….
Sorry. I think I’m being mean today. I need to remember that the first thing that pops into my head, although (arguably) witty, may not need to be said or typed.
Comment by claiborneinmemphis — 16 November 2009 @ 4:54 pmAnd that old sisters in pantsuits need prayer, not my mocking.
Comment by claiborneinmemphis — 16 November 2009 @ 4:55 pmSad to say, the set design in their temporary Baltimore studio needs improvement. Sr. Piil, with her white hair, seems to blend into the light background.
Comment by chonak — 16 November 2009 @ 5:04 pmARGH! Process!
All we need is to process the process by which we process what processed through the procession which the bishops processed as a united discussion that will lead to union in processed discussion whereby we are united in discussing the beautiful united procession!
Comment by Bill Haley — 16 November 2009 @ 5:09 pm(N.B. I just came in from my work, so please don’t blame me for being non sequitur.) But from what I’m seeing, this limiting of feed to some random, obscure network in New York (or wherever that Telecare place is, unlike the national EWTN network) is not helpful for the Bishop’s PR nor their visibility to the public nor is it helping with their argument of blocking the liturgical translation (but let’s not argue about this; I can get into an argument about that later).
Anyway, if these guys want to actually help the people get closer to God through this liturgical improvement (or any of their other votes), they need to know that the populus is watching their moves—these bishops need to know that they’re here to get people get closer to God, not farther away (not that all bishops are bad; I’m just saying this as a warning). And a new liturgical translation that can most portray the holiness of the moment could possibly do that. (However, let’s give the bishops the benefit of the doubt for this blocking of the translation, for we don’t know their intentions.)
Also, by that example of the new translation that I saw on Fr. Z’s previous entries, I say that they’re pretty theologically sound and more in-depth, unlike the old ones. So, God willing, let’s pray that this recommendation won’t come true.
(And I hope that they’ll get something comprehensive on same-sex marriage and the voting process; after I saw the Washington Post’s views on the matter with Wuerl, Catholic Charities, and the DC Council, it’s just left me confused. We need some episcopal help in DC!)
Comment by J-T Delacroix — 16 November 2009 @ 5:23 pmRocco Palmo is providing minute-by-minute Cover It Live text coverage of the meeting at
http://whispersintheloggia.blogspot.com/
Just wrapped up the first day’s meeting a 5:28 pm EST. No liturgy votes today.
Comment by Henry Edwards — 16 November 2009 @ 5:32 pmOh, actually, about that same-sex stuff, I thought that the Bishops’ document would include what to do about the voting process and gay marriage, but I think it’s just about opposition to gay marriage in general (they generally don’t tend to make political statements in their letters saying “vote for the gay guy” or somewhere along those lines). Whoops.
But then again, we won’t know until they publish it, will we?
Comment by J-T Delacroix — 16 November 2009 @ 5:33 pmHowever, let’s give the bishops the benefit of the doubt for this blocking of the translation, for we don’t know their intentions.
Speak for yourself. Those of us who’ve been following this translation business—on a line by line and virtually day by day basis—for most of the third millenium so far, surely know their intentions as well as they themselves do.
Comment by Henry Edwards — 16 November 2009 @ 5:36 pmIt’ll be rerun and presumably restreamed at 7 pm ET, which is good for us who didn’t see the morning session.
Comment by chonak — 16 November 2009 @ 5:59 pmWhen are they actually going to cast a vote on the translations?
Comment by catholicmidwest — 16 November 2009 @ 6:45 pmIt’s available on demand when you start watching the live feed. Does anyone else find it strange that Archbishop Niederaur was fielding questions about gay marriage? The same guy who gave Communion to Sisters of Perpetual indulgence? The same guy who’s CCHD was funding organizations pushing for passage of gay marriage in CA? Oy.
Comment by BenFischer — 16 November 2009 @ 6:57 pmFor the record, I will admit being an idiot and just now realizing I have no idea what this means:
Bp. Wester (D.Salt Lake City) reports that Nat. Advisory Council recommended the passing of the block of translations.
Does that mean (a)Bishop Wester wants the translations to be passed as a whole (a block), or (b) he wants to pass a resolution blocking the translations?
They’re both completely opposite. Should I be rooting for Bishop Wester or not?
Comment by AndyMo — 16 November 2009 @ 6:57 pmAndyMo—I am certain that the sense of whole is what was meant.
Comment by Fr. Erik Richtsteig — 16 November 2009 @ 7:27 pmThe Telecare website looks a bit shabby, as does the production, and in my view is not ‘The Best in Catholic Television’. Why on earth have the US Bishops gone for this television company when EWTN is respected and the most watched professional Catholic channel in the world.
Comment by jlong — 16 November 2009 @ 7:38 pmBecause no one can get the reception??
Comment by catholicmidwest — 16 November 2009 @ 7:47 pmI would urge the comments here to reflect some respect for Bishop Trautman. While I do not agree with him, with respect to the translations issues, he is still a man of good faith and in good standing with the Church, and is still an heir to the Apostles, last time I checked. “Trautperson” may be cute or funny once, but repeatedly is not worthy of a Catholic. Ditto just throwing around his last name as if he were some unproductive player on your fantasy football team roster.
Just my 2 cents. I am only a friar, and my habit is flame-resistant, so feel free to flame me in his stead, if you feel the need.
Comment by Random Friar — 16 November 2009 @ 8:15 pmRandom Friar: Generous. Thanks.
Comment by Fr. John Zuhlsdorf — 16 November 2009 @ 8:35 pmRandom friar,
There is an old saying, attributed to St. John Chrysostom, that goes like this: “Hell is paved with the skulls of bishops.”
Attribution: http://www.firstthings.com/onthesquare/2008/02/paved-with-the-skulls-of-bisho
Note who used the quote in the First Things piece. Care to comment?
I, for one, am not sure that everyone’s motivations are always lily white. That, in fact, was a flash point that preceded my conversion to Catholicism. Secularists, always ready to see all things as relative, believe that motivations are always pure, people always do their best and don’t sin, and that all things are amenable to compromise and consensus. The world does not bear that out—it doesn’t really work that way. People can do evil things and often do.
Comment by catholicmidwest — 16 November 2009 @ 8:39 pmHas anyone mentioned that all the Propers are available to read here http://www.usccb.org/meetings/2009Fall/
on the sidebar?
One word: BEAUTIFUL!
Comment by Fr. Steve — 16 November 2009 @ 8:42 pmOur should I say, INEFFABLE!
Comment by Fr. Steve — 16 November 2009 @ 8:47 pmCatholicmidwest: Bishops have the most to answer for, so they should not be surprised if they are judged most exactingly by our Lord. But the FT author is talking about the abuse scandal and its root causes (as I assume the Bishop Bruskewitz was), and was a good examination of conscience for the college of bishops for their failure to protect the most vulnerable as they should have. I do not think that this translation issue falls in the same ballpark.
So pray especially for the bishops working on this. Even oecumenical councils defining dogma didn’t always have 100% voting, alas. Pray for the bishops to listen to the calling of the Holy Spirit in this matter. Hell may be paved with their skulls, but our Lord may ask us why we did not pray for them more.
Comment by Random Friar — 16 November 2009 @ 8:56 pmFr. Gould is sorely missed. He wasn’t on EWTN the last few times. Did his bishop nix his commenting?
Comment by boko fittleworth — 16 November 2009 @ 8:57 pmI think this translation is at least as important as that “ballpark.” The mass is the source and summit of our faith. It’s what makes goodness, rather than the corruption, possible.
Comment by catholicmidwest — 16 November 2009 @ 8:59 pmCatholicmidwest and others: I need to shut down from my office and go home for the night, so please understand if I do not respond right away. Pax tecum.
Comment by Random Friar — 16 November 2009 @ 9:01 pmI expect the USCCB picked Telecare because it’s run by a diocese: in this case, Bp. William Murphy of Rockville Centre. I wonder if the USCCB will start taking turns among various Catholic TV organizations that offer to do the job.
Comment by chonak — 16 November 2009 @ 9:25 pmLet us pray that the bishops will vote and allow us to have proper translations that glorify The Lord. Kyrie eleison!
Comment by Dr. Eric — 16 November 2009 @ 11:23 pmI just saw the re=airing of Friday’s The World Over. Ray closes by saying that they will not be airing the USCCB meetings for the first time in 20 years. Explains USCCB contracted with another network. He promises a full discussion on next Friday’s show.
I also saw the USCCCB’s twitter feed from the presser. I get so frustrated about their healthcare stand. They seem quite pleased with where things are at b/c of STupak. They hope for the same from the Senate. The comment intimated that the USCCB was successful on Stupak b/c the USCCB was open to health care reform, which we must conclude means that they do support the overall Dem govt-heavy approach.
Comment by Peggy R — 17 November 2009 @ 12:02 amAndyMo—I am certain that the sense of whole is what was meant.
Thanks, Fr. Orthometer. I figured that was the case, since you were cheering Bishop Wester on; I just wasn’t sure on reading it the first time. Let’s hope they get it passed today!
Comment by AndyMo — 17 November 2009 @ 10:27 amI have just started to watch the live stream, only 343 people are watching, and the commentary is a littl boring.
I have just seen a section on the show which had liturgical dancing, children dressed as angels goin down the aisl, what on earth is going on with this TV stating.
Also, why do Sisters refuse to wear the habit.
Comment by jlong — 17 November 2009 @ 10:41 amFor what it may be worth, I sent an e-mail to the USCCB’s media communications department encouraging them to return the coverage to EWTN in the future.
I used commdept@usccb.org
Comment by Frank H — 17 November 2009 @ 10:59 amIt’s kind of like watching paint dry, only not as exciting. I miss Bishop Burke! He always kept things moving.
Comment by Kimberly — 17 November 2009 @ 11:02 amThe sex abuse presentation – the old gal is hovering over the young one like a protective mother hawk…
m
Comment by iudicame — 17 November 2009 @ 11:44 amsex abuse presentation
Comment by iudicame — 17 November 2009 @ 11:58 amthey are saying priests back in the day didnt knowwwwwww they were homosexual so therefore no connection can be made between sexual ID and sexual abuse. OK
m